|
Abductee by Red Sector Inc. [web]
[nfo]
|
||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
popularity : 65% |
|||||||||||||
alltime top: #2340 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
added on the 2014-10-05 00:58:34 by Baudsurfer  |
||||||||||||||
popularity helper
comments
Fantastic!
Awesome!
Very good work as always Baudsurfer !
realtime crease darkening
The next one should be named "cupe" - please! :)
nice!
Cool
i expected more, but still nice ;)
black magic :D
Great entry.
Trippy!
Alien spaceship!
Less is More, as always with Baudsurfer's prods.
Fantastic :)
Alien spaceship!
Less is More, as always with Baudsurfer's prods.
Fantastic :)
Looks better than other 256b prods of this kind
colours are luxury, contrast is what you need
great
Nice and fitting sound too.
very very moody. great intro!
That's bloody amazing :)
.
I wanted to release something similar one or two years ago for IND (I believe this one works like neonstation) but unfortunately we never found time to translate/optimize it to ASM and it stayed a prototype. Good job for your prod!
Pretty darn good!
Where is the T ? ;)
Crazy!
This is pretty fucking cool. I have no idea how this was rendered.
What rez said. This is something f**kin' black magic!
Very, very nice!
Very, very nice!
Thanks for all the fisting!
aaand another baudsurfin' jawdropper
the quality we are used to ;)
absolutely amazing!
absolutely amazing!
solid 256b, as usual
"x2+x*ca-y*sa y2+z z2+y*ca+x*sa y*ca+x*sa z x*ca-y*sa x y z+1"
Nice, but I think I liked some of your others better even if they were simpler.
Despite the sound, I prefer Neonstation and Phobia
What p01 said.
Great stuff!
yes
Too shaky & rough for me.
couldnt spot abductee there, but nice anyway :)
Choppy.
Yes good work
Rulez for 256b.
Baudsurfer: you know what you are doing. Very, very, good, man.
Congratulations!
Congratulations!
what photon said, although still a weak thumb
Yes, it is not as good looking as the mentionned ones, but still..
Thank you for (mostly) kind words, although I have to say that I am not too comfortable with a minoirity comparing pears with apples and not doing their mouse-clicking homework right.
1)Abductee clearly cannot be compared with Phobia because the latter has no camera path nor 2.2) 2.3) and 2.4) below.
2)Abductee could be compared with Neon Station because the latter has a camera path, although the 3d Lissajous curve scalars as well as the textures are different :
2.1) Neon Station has smoother camera path than Abductee ;
2.2) Abductee has sound contrary to Neon Station ;
2.3) Abductee has dynamic lighting contrary to Neon Station ;
2.4) Abductee has sourcecode provided contrary to Neon Station.
All three aforementioned prods Abductee 2014 (38 votes), Neon Station 2008 (199 votes) and Phobia 2007 (88 votes) are worthy but comparing them makes little sense to me.
1)Abductee clearly cannot be compared with Phobia because the latter has no camera path nor 2.2) 2.3) and 2.4) below.
2)Abductee could be compared with Neon Station because the latter has a camera path, although the 3d Lissajous curve scalars as well as the textures are different :
2.1) Neon Station has smoother camera path than Abductee ;
2.2) Abductee has sound contrary to Neon Station ;
2.3) Abductee has dynamic lighting contrary to Neon Station ;
2.4) Abductee has sourcecode provided contrary to Neon Station.
All three aforementioned prods Abductee 2014 (38 votes), Neon Station 2008 (199 votes) and Phobia 2007 (88 votes) are worthy but comparing them makes little sense to me.
Also the core rendering technique (ie: engine) for Abductee, Neon Station and Phobia are different : while Abductee uses raymarching (aka volume ray casting), Neon Station and Phobia use standard ray casting. The gained bytes of Abductee using this different technique over an already optimal implementation like Neon Station, and used to add dynamic lighting, ambient sound and gradient textures, also partly explains the smoother camera path of Neon Station and AntDude and Photon's "Choppy" or "Too shaky & rough for me" piggy comments above. If this was not the case (rough vs. smooth, raymarching vs. raycasting) however, than probably no additional features could have been added.
Baudsurfer: I guess - and I can only speak for myself, sure - it is more a matter of taste than comparing pears with apples :)
Very nice!
ÜHH... AWSUM!
@Baudsurfer : I confirm Phobia do some raycasting, as it renders the intersection of 3 planes, one in each axis. Neon Station also do raycasting but it is slightly more complex. It first build a 3d grid, carved from camera path. Then each ray walks across the 3d grid using some DDA (Digital Differential Analysis). Once something is hit, the color/normal is defined by difference of cell coordinates before and on collision. Neon station use a technique which is similar to hell.
Well, actually this is 6 planes not 3, since for each axis it is rendered twice (top bottom, left right, front back).
BaudSurfer: Don't really see any reason to "address" 3 piggy votes vs. 40 thumbs. :/ But OK.
We coders would all like to be appreciated for our efforts, but MIDI sound and source available are not points in favor for a PC(VM) intro. You already get byte-instructions and a screen buffer basically for free, in a range of VMs that you choose to code for instead of "just PC". I don't mean this in a harsh way, but it is the truth. You have a lot to play with :)
When does a sizecoding intro cease being enjoyable? At .1 fps? When a coordinate-step is half a screen? It's a decision to make, of course.
There's no allegation here. In my case, it was too choppy to be enjoyable. Has nothing to do with other mentioned 256b intros for me.
We coders would all like to be appreciated for our efforts, but MIDI sound and source available are not points in favor for a PC(VM) intro. You already get byte-instructions and a screen buffer basically for free, in a range of VMs that you choose to code for instead of "just PC". I don't mean this in a harsh way, but it is the truth. You have a lot to play with :)
When does a sizecoding intro cease being enjoyable? At .1 fps? When a coordinate-step is half a screen? It's a decision to make, of course.
There's no allegation here. In my case, it was too choppy to be enjoyable. Has nothing to do with other mentioned 256b intros for me.
Tigrou : thank you for confirmation and extra information.
Photon : No I don't think this is the truth. It is solely obviously yours. There are too many errors in your above statement to address them all here : I understand you feel PC sizetros have an unfair advantage over Amiga sizetros.
Photon : No I don't think this is the truth. It is solely obviously yours. There are too many errors in your above statement to address them all here : I understand you feel PC sizetros have an unfair advantage over Amiga sizetros.
No, not at all. PC(VM) has several advantages over all other platforms.
Your claim is that there are any errors in my above statement. You better address them then, I suppose.
Your claim is that there are any errors in my above statement. You better address them then, I suppose.
On the other hand, that would be a topic separate from your prod, and best discussed in the "bbs".
Awesome.
Wow!
Dear Photon, here are the unfair/wrongful sub-components in your replies :
1) you state the subjects you bring up should/"would be a topic separate from your prod, and best discussed in the "bbs"", yet you make such statement on this production's comment page and not in a bbs post yourself.
2) you hint (cf. "MIDI sound...are no points for a PC(VM) intro", "...in a range of VMs that you choose", "...instead of "just PC"), at the fact that I or other "Dos sizecode" programmers inherently/deceitfully benefit from a loose definition of "MS-Dos" platform to our own adavantage. It is uncalled for in the sense that I personally have attempted several times during last years to clarify the x86/dos/ntvdm/vm imbroglio (see bbs post http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=9322&page=2 for an example), alas to no avail but always without reading a single contribution on your part on this matter in purposeful thread(s).
3) you pretend to act surprised when I see a "...reason to "address" 3 piggy votes vs. 40 thumbs". I initially indeed adressed indirectly your "too shaky & rough for me" comment, but solely to point out the difference in rendering techniques between raycasting and inherently rougher raymarching in lowres. My remark wasn't intended at you or for you, explictely or implicitely (please see my wording above again), but rather to inform others that would inevitably stumble upon your comment notably of my pondered choice (although initial choice questionable) to fit in more features in the limited size and hence did not necessarily represent either a faulty algorithm implementation nor necessarily bad coding.
But now that I look into your behaviour in more details, it is a fact that out of the last 13 (http://www.pouet.net/groups.php?which=992&order=release) Red Sector Inc. productions, you rated 1 thumb-up and 2 piggies, systematically spreading negativity through your comments in every one of these 3 cases ("p.s. I hear a high pitched whirr with frequency drops.", "OK, so it's supposed to glitch. 256b with clip (or whatever) fix possible?", "Too shaky & rough for me."), while incidently during that exact same period you also refrained from commenting on any of our top 3 thumbed productions this year (wolf128 w/74 thumbs, Mayan /w 63 thumbs and Orbit /w 51 thumbs). The latter discrepancies, along with your choice of words ("truth", "allegations", "harsh") explain in turn to some extent why I have becomed logically slightly wary of your objectivity regardless the seemingly genuinely innocent fast "fly-by" commenting.
4) you refute the fact that providing sourcecode ought could be taken in account in voting to some extent ("...source available are not points in favor for a PC(VM) intro."). I obviously think differently : it helps other programmers to progress and neophytes to "jump in" the otherwise intimidating demoscene wagon. Must I remind you how you contradictorily value sourcecode in other similar contexts such as when you proudly announced "Amiga democoding site launched" (http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=9933) in the bbs section focusing on the "learning" advantages.
5) you state that Abductee is too slow to be anywhere enjoyable to watch ("When does a sizecoding intro cease being enjoyable? At .1 fps? When a coordinate-step is half a screen?"). Apart from the fact that Youtube and emulators seem to accepted nowadays - having a non-accelerated computer has not thereby withheld me from up-thumbing accelerated prods - it is really exaggerated in the way you formulated your sentence. When you read the associated .nfo you can read "a DOS 256 byte intro tested on xpsp3 ntvdm and DOSBox-0.74" and my first comment on this page states "B)always works on : vmware (proper speed), virtualpc (75% speed) and dosbox(slowest)". It runs easily 40 fps in xp3 ntvdm on a thirteen year-old (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2) non-accelerated laptop that could not run any of the latest games, and I invite you to verify it. But since it was developped for a competition mentionning "real dos", it was also crafted to work at same speed in Win95 MS-Dos (under XP type command.com and launch intro) which by Wikipedia's standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS) is defined as being one of the only 2 "real Dos" amongst other 42 Dos-like clones (including the Dos flavour the organizers thought to be "real Dos" incidently).
Bottom line is : the only case where Abductee is close to .1 fps (actually frameskip=4 in provided dosbox-O.74.conf - yet another exaggeration of yours) is when ran in DosBox which is known not to be cycle-correct and uncomprehensively slow : it's not even an emulator (the lower 128 characters in cp437 bios font fixed-area ROM memory differs for copyright reasons for example) and its original authors' purpose is old 2D Sierra Leisure Suit Larry games retrogaming. So as someone of rzr1911 stated elsewhere on this site, if you are anywhere serious about sizecoding, get vmware or remain on a 16-bit platform. I assume your "When a coordinate-step is half a screen?" remark also comes from the DosBox version since the associated "frameskip=4" specification has sadly indeed the verified described behaviour.
6) You state Abductee isn't oldschool enough ("...of VMs that you choose to code for instead of "just PC"). Besides the fact that the only "PC" category existing on this site is "MS-Dos 256b" - see point 1) thus making any truly x86 only production meaningless, if you look at the associated sourcecode, you will notice there are absolutely no calls tying Abductee to "Dos" whatsoever : it runs on barebone x86 architecture, meaning these 256 bytes could be injected "as is" in a 512 bytes Master boot record (MBR) common to Windows, Linux and Apple OS X. Furthermore there are no new era opcodes (486+) present, meaning it would also run "as is" in 1989. The 1-byte ocopdes you refer to ("You already get byte-instructions [...] for free") actually date back to the 8080 days introduced in 1974 (where you even born then ?). In the light of this and aforementionned dates ("You already get [...] a screen buffer basically for free"), is Advanced graphics architecture (AGA) where functions such as drawline are also "free" really that more oldschool worthy ? I think not.
1) you state the subjects you bring up should/"would be a topic separate from your prod, and best discussed in the "bbs"", yet you make such statement on this production's comment page and not in a bbs post yourself.
2) you hint (cf. "MIDI sound...are no points for a PC(VM) intro", "...in a range of VMs that you choose", "...instead of "just PC"), at the fact that I or other "Dos sizecode" programmers inherently/deceitfully benefit from a loose definition of "MS-Dos" platform to our own adavantage. It is uncalled for in the sense that I personally have attempted several times during last years to clarify the x86/dos/ntvdm/vm imbroglio (see bbs post http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=9322&page=2 for an example), alas to no avail but always without reading a single contribution on your part on this matter in purposeful thread(s).
3) you pretend to act surprised when I see a "...reason to "address" 3 piggy votes vs. 40 thumbs". I initially indeed adressed indirectly your "too shaky & rough for me" comment, but solely to point out the difference in rendering techniques between raycasting and inherently rougher raymarching in lowres. My remark wasn't intended at you or for you, explictely or implicitely (please see my wording above again), but rather to inform others that would inevitably stumble upon your comment notably of my pondered choice (although initial choice questionable) to fit in more features in the limited size and hence did not necessarily represent either a faulty algorithm implementation nor necessarily bad coding.
But now that I look into your behaviour in more details, it is a fact that out of the last 13 (http://www.pouet.net/groups.php?which=992&order=release) Red Sector Inc. productions, you rated 1 thumb-up and 2 piggies, systematically spreading negativity through your comments in every one of these 3 cases ("p.s. I hear a high pitched whirr with frequency drops.", "OK, so it's supposed to glitch. 256b with clip (or whatever) fix possible?", "Too shaky & rough for me."), while incidently during that exact same period you also refrained from commenting on any of our top 3 thumbed productions this year (wolf128 w/74 thumbs, Mayan /w 63 thumbs and Orbit /w 51 thumbs). The latter discrepancies, along with your choice of words ("truth", "allegations", "harsh") explain in turn to some extent why I have becomed logically slightly wary of your objectivity regardless the seemingly genuinely innocent fast "fly-by" commenting.
4) you refute the fact that providing sourcecode ought could be taken in account in voting to some extent ("...source available are not points in favor for a PC(VM) intro."). I obviously think differently : it helps other programmers to progress and neophytes to "jump in" the otherwise intimidating demoscene wagon. Must I remind you how you contradictorily value sourcecode in other similar contexts such as when you proudly announced "Amiga democoding site launched" (http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=9933) in the bbs section focusing on the "learning" advantages.
5) you state that Abductee is too slow to be anywhere enjoyable to watch ("When does a sizecoding intro cease being enjoyable? At .1 fps? When a coordinate-step is half a screen?"). Apart from the fact that Youtube and emulators seem to accepted nowadays - having a non-accelerated computer has not thereby withheld me from up-thumbing accelerated prods - it is really exaggerated in the way you formulated your sentence. When you read the associated .nfo you can read "a DOS 256 byte intro tested on xpsp3 ntvdm and DOSBox-0.74" and my first comment on this page states "B)always works on : vmware (proper speed), virtualpc (75% speed) and dosbox(slowest)". It runs easily 40 fps in xp3 ntvdm on a thirteen year-old (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2) non-accelerated laptop that could not run any of the latest games, and I invite you to verify it. But since it was developped for a competition mentionning "real dos", it was also crafted to work at same speed in Win95 MS-Dos (under XP type command.com and launch intro) which by Wikipedia's standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS) is defined as being one of the only 2 "real Dos" amongst other 42 Dos-like clones (including the Dos flavour the organizers thought to be "real Dos" incidently).
Bottom line is : the only case where Abductee is close to .1 fps (actually frameskip=4 in provided dosbox-O.74.conf - yet another exaggeration of yours) is when ran in DosBox which is known not to be cycle-correct and uncomprehensively slow : it's not even an emulator (the lower 128 characters in cp437 bios font fixed-area ROM memory differs for copyright reasons for example) and its original authors' purpose is old 2D Sierra Leisure Suit Larry games retrogaming. So as someone of rzr1911 stated elsewhere on this site, if you are anywhere serious about sizecoding, get vmware or remain on a 16-bit platform. I assume your "When a coordinate-step is half a screen?" remark also comes from the DosBox version since the associated "frameskip=4" specification has sadly indeed the verified described behaviour.
6) You state Abductee isn't oldschool enough ("...of VMs that you choose to code for instead of "just PC"). Besides the fact that the only "PC" category existing on this site is "MS-Dos 256b" - see point 1) thus making any truly x86 only production meaningless, if you look at the associated sourcecode, you will notice there are absolutely no calls tying Abductee to "Dos" whatsoever : it runs on barebone x86 architecture, meaning these 256 bytes could be injected "as is" in a 512 bytes Master boot record (MBR) common to Windows, Linux and Apple OS X. Furthermore there are no new era opcodes (486+) present, meaning it would also run "as is" in 1989. The 1-byte ocopdes you refer to ("You already get byte-instructions [...] for free") actually date back to the 8080 days introduced in 1974 (where you even born then ?). In the light of this and aforementionned dates ("You already get [...] a screen buffer basically for free"), is Advanced graphics architecture (AGA) where functions such as drawline are also "free" really that more oldschool worthy ? I think not.
You seem to want to make this personal. Again, I would have rather discussed PC(VM) advantages etc in a thread.
1) You claimed there were any errors in my statements. I first asked you to address them then, but then saw that you didn't want to address them here, so I suggested a thread instead. And now you address them here, and at the same time make this accusation. That's weird.
2) No, YOU want extra credits for the 8 bytes of code or so required to trigger some MIDI instrument, even though you recommend XPSP3. It doesn't work in XPSP3. It works in a VM. You should recommend a VM if you want credit for playing sound.
3) Yes, because you seem to demand that everyone thumb this up and make a fight with anyone who disagrees. Zero thumbs down and only 3 piggies is very good, you don't need to pick fights.
I actually think very carefully how I feel about a prod before commenting, no matter if I thumb up, down or piggie. Sometimes I write how I feel, sometimes I report errors, sometimes I feedback. I usually run it several times, read NFOs, check files, etc to make sure there's no error on my part.
4) No, this was just in response to you trying somehow to claim that this was better than the other 256bs mentioned. When picking a fight with a guy who mentioned them and thumbed yours up... The reason sourcecode is not a point in favor is that it takes 1 minute for them to add sourcecode to their prods, and then the advantage is gone. That is what I mean.
5) The original comment "Too choppy & rough" referred to the blockiness of textures and coordinate aliasing in XPSP3. The effect has been done before in 256b without these artifacts. The coordinate precision is easily fixed. So, piggie.
6) This is what the discussion in a thread would have been about. PC sizecoders want to eat the cookie and have it too (unless they recommend a single fixed platform in an NFO, of course). Don't recommend XPSP3 if you want oldskool cred from MS-DOS, and don't complain about comments about low FPS or similar if you recommend DosBox.
This is just a reply to your defensive claims and allegations as on-topic as possible. The only point that is relevant to this prod is 5).
1) You claimed there were any errors in my statements. I first asked you to address them then, but then saw that you didn't want to address them here, so I suggested a thread instead. And now you address them here, and at the same time make this accusation. That's weird.
2) No, YOU want extra credits for the 8 bytes of code or so required to trigger some MIDI instrument, even though you recommend XPSP3. It doesn't work in XPSP3. It works in a VM. You should recommend a VM if you want credit for playing sound.
3) Yes, because you seem to demand that everyone thumb this up and make a fight with anyone who disagrees. Zero thumbs down and only 3 piggies is very good, you don't need to pick fights.
I actually think very carefully how I feel about a prod before commenting, no matter if I thumb up, down or piggie. Sometimes I write how I feel, sometimes I report errors, sometimes I feedback. I usually run it several times, read NFOs, check files, etc to make sure there's no error on my part.
4) No, this was just in response to you trying somehow to claim that this was better than the other 256bs mentioned. When picking a fight with a guy who mentioned them and thumbed yours up... The reason sourcecode is not a point in favor is that it takes 1 minute for them to add sourcecode to their prods, and then the advantage is gone. That is what I mean.
5) The original comment "Too choppy & rough" referred to the blockiness of textures and coordinate aliasing in XPSP3. The effect has been done before in 256b without these artifacts. The coordinate precision is easily fixed. So, piggie.
6) This is what the discussion in a thread would have been about. PC sizecoders want to eat the cookie and have it too (unless they recommend a single fixed platform in an NFO, of course). Don't recommend XPSP3 if you want oldskool cred from MS-DOS, and don't complain about comments about low FPS or similar if you recommend DosBox.
This is just a reply to your defensive claims and allegations as on-topic as possible. The only point that is relevant to this prod is 5).
I don't want to go into the personal part of the debate.
However, I must point out that the addition of source code is not about the '1 minute' of copy&paste, it's rather a philosophical issue. The creator does a favor for both the audience and his/her competition at the same time by unveiling his/her secrets. This might diminish the edge one might have for the next party for no other justification than common good.
Actually I'd be much happier if a greater portion of sceners would open up their sources, because the scene is almost always non-profit and about the community anyway. (By the way, I am missing a proper copyright and licensing statement for this entry.)
My personal view on 256 byte DOS coding is that you should support the hardware of the era and if possible at least one emulator commonly available at present to verify. I guess a 486 (or Pentium) would be a realistic baseline, however MMX, SSE or SSE2 would be a bit of a stretch because other operating systems were both available and more popular by the mid 90's. Mind you that a slideshow of pretty pictures is also a nice feat. If this is too restrictive in a given case, one can always use a more recent platform and category.
However, I must point out that the addition of source code is not about the '1 minute' of copy&paste, it's rather a philosophical issue. The creator does a favor for both the audience and his/her competition at the same time by unveiling his/her secrets. This might diminish the edge one might have for the next party for no other justification than common good.
Actually I'd be much happier if a greater portion of sceners would open up their sources, because the scene is almost always non-profit and about the community anyway. (By the way, I am missing a proper copyright and licensing statement for this entry.)
My personal view on 256 byte DOS coding is that you should support the hardware of the era and if possible at least one emulator commonly available at present to verify. I guess a 486 (or Pentium) would be a realistic baseline, however MMX, SSE or SSE2 would be a bit of a stretch because other operating systems were both available and more popular by the mid 90's. Mind you that a slideshow of pretty pictures is also a nice feat. If this is too restrictive in a given case, one can always use a more recent platform and category.
Well, Photon is cool and so is Scoopex.
Brain Killingly Innovative Lead : I like your style.
Brain Killingly Innovative Lead : I like your style.
This tiny intro was nominated at Meteoriks award in 2014 and even got an "honorable mention" (2nd-place like), although not obvious on the result page.
Since not all categories had "honorable mentions" maybe the Meteroiks organizers will resort to mentionning this somehow in accordance with what their homepage initially stated "Out of these nominations, a winner and possible honorable mentions will be picked". Since there is already a gold "M" avatar for German winner maybe a classic gold/silver/bronze formalism would be appropriate. Thanks and congratulations for the showin Saarbrücken Germany. !
Since not all categories had "honorable mentions" maybe the Meteroiks organizers will resort to mentionning this somehow in accordance with what their homepage initially stated "Out of these nominations, a winner and possible honorable mentions will be picked". Since there is already a gold "M" avatar for German winner maybe a classic gold/silver/bronze formalism would be appropriate. Thanks and congratulations for the showin Saarbrücken Germany. !
Okay, that was creepy.
Solid prod.
Creating long prate statements because somebody expressed his feeling different than "Awesome, magic, you are God" is extremely disgusting.
Creating long prate statements because somebody expressed his feeling different than "Awesome, magic, you are God" is extremely disgusting.
proper
yep
Technically very advanced!
submit changes
if this prod is a fake, some info is false or the download link is broken,
do not post about it in the comments, it will get lost.
instead, click here !
B)always works on : vmware (proper speed), virtualpc (75% speed) and dosbox(slowest)
Abductee is party version to which A) and B) apply (tested NOK with i7 but OK with Core2 Duo)
Run Abductee_safesound if party version crashed but you have midi properly installed/activated
Run Abductee_safe if party version crashed and you do not have midi properly installed/activated
If you do not know how to set midi look here : http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=61076#c639273
read Abductee.nfo for commented sourcecode and contact information.
Thanks to Pasy for helping and finding viable working solution through several email exchanges.
Youtube video link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiTYUB1tpiY